Clerk of the Month...



Runnymede Council are spending tax payers money on behalf of land developer: Galliford Try Plc.


So, who at Runnymede Council are getting a bung?

Geoffrey Woodger?

Bob Etheridge?

Paul Turrell?

John Furey?

Patrick Roberts?

Mario Leo?

Hugh Meares?

John Ashmore?

Bernard Fleckney?

 
Galliford Try Plc are one of the UK’s leading housebuilding and construction groups with revenues of over £1.6 billion. How are they getting planning permission to build on green belt land?

Why is Philip Hammond MP and Justice Minister Chris Grayling so keen to prosecute the Beach family at Padd Farm? Philip Hammond MP had his own land development company: Castlemead Group Limited, who build luxury homes and care homes. Should Philip Hammond be added to the above list?

To save paying inheritance tax, Philip Hammond MP transferred his assets and put his wife in charge of his building company. Just before the Governments new legislation on tax and stamp duty for property owned by offshore companies came into force. If you consider he is an MP and legislation is laid down by Parliament - the more cynical of us would say that was insider trading!
 
VOTE

 
Government Minister comes to the AID of Runnymede Council E-mail
 
Chris GraylingChris GraylingOn behalf of Runnymede Borough Council, Justice Minister, Chris Grayling has made a formal complaint to the appeal courts about the length of time it is taking to deal with the Beach family. Phillip HammondPhillip Hammond
 
In addition, Runnymede Borough Council also submitted a request to Philip Hammond MP to have the cases against Mr & Mrs Beach fast-tracked. Philip Hammond MP has a long standing interest in the proposed development at Hurst Lane (Click Here). A housing development which includes land currently owned by the Beach family.

The stepping up of a trial or appeal hearing is normally reserved for people who are in custody - in order for them to get a fair trial as soon as possible. But Mr & Mrs Beach are not in custody.


So why the hurry?

Well, Mr & Mrs Beach have until the end of this month (January 2014) to accept an offer for their land (Padd Farm) for an ‘undisclosed’ amount.

Therefore there was no surprise that the recent involvement of Justice Minister, Chris Grayling and Phillip Hammond MP resulted in Mr Beach’s appeal hearing (which was scheduled later on this year) being brought forward to the 21st January 2014.

However, regular readers and other UK farmers will be pleased to know that a judge has spotted the irregularities in the cases against Mr & Mrs Beach and has asked for all relevant paperwork.

Irregularities such as how can a chicken farmer, on one hand, be fined £100 for breaching a planning enforcement, and on the other, allegedly benefit £308,332.95 during a 6 month period as a result of the same breach. Mr Beach was ordered to pay a confiscation order of £250,000 or face imprisonment (if not paid) on the basis of the alleged profiteering.

Then and in addition, the exact same claim and allegations were brought against Mr Beach's wife - who had no active involvement in the running of the farm whatsoever. Effectively, doubling up on what was originally a spurious claim of alleged profiteering. A claim taken to court by Runnymede Council firstly against Mr Beach and then separately against Mrs Beach.

Mr Beach’s answer to the increasingly frequent police visits and continuing harassment by the local authorities is; unless the council’s favoured land development company make me a decent and tangible offer for my land. My family and I will remain at Padd Farm for a ‘undisclosed’ amount of time.

We live in hope that the British judicial system will eventually see through what is really happening here in Runnymede - not just for the sake of the Beach family but also for other honest farmers and small-holders throughout the UK.

 
Royal Bank of Scotland are forcing good companies out of business E-mail
It has been recently alleged that The Royal Bank of Scotland are forcing good companies out of business - so that they can cash-in on the companies assets. The bank engineer a situation where they can sell the firm’s assets at knock down prices to itself (usually a subsidiary) and then sell the acquired assets on at the proper market value. Making a hefty profit.

Councillors have a similar mindset. This is a typical check-list:

1.    Target a land owner.
2.    Do a deal with a ‘friendly’ land developer at arms length.
3.    Issue deceptive and unlawful enforcement notices on the land owner.
4.    Bribe or threaten the land owner’s legal team if they put up a fight.
5.    Set up a public inquiry as cover and ensure the land owner loses (See item 4 above)
6.    Prosecute the land owner and go after the owner using the Proceeds of Crime Act.
7.    Ensure the land owner is facing a custodial term if he does not pay the inflated fine(s).
8.    Ensure that the land owner cannot sell his land, other to the preferred land developer.
9.    Just in case the land owner pays the fines. Prosecute the land owner's spouse as a backup.


Most targeted land owners at this stage would throw in the towel and sell-up to the conspiring land developer (No 2 above). The council would then approve planning permissions etc for the exact same land. The land is then sold on (with planning permission) at a hugely marked up price. The unscrupulous councillor(s) get a share of the profits. Job done.

But not Mr Beach. Even though he has endured all items listed above, he is unyielding and determined in exposing the conspiracy and corporate bullying he and his family have been exposed to. Let me explain:

Mr Beach owns a farm in Egham. Since the 80's, he and his family have been working on the farm without any major problems. In 2007 Mr Beach was served with several enforcement notices. 48 alleged planning breaches. Mr Beach tried to negotiate with Runnymede Council at the time, but they refused to listen. Instead, an expensive nine day public inquiry was called. Mr Beach spent a small fortune in defending the alleged planning breaches with the help of a law firm called Blandy and Blandy Solicitors.

After a couple of days at the public inquiry, it became clear that Mr Beach’s legal team (Blandy and Blandy) had little interest in defending him and Mr Beach walked out in disgust. Witnesses at the inquiry say that it was blatantly one sided. As if all the lawyers and barristers, Including Mr Beach’s legal team, were working for Runnymede Borough Council.

Subsequently, Mr Beach and his family have been subjected to several unauthorised raids by the council, police and summons to Crown Court for his alleged criminal life-style. This allegation is just spin by Runnymede Council. Mr Beach’s lifestyle is that of a chicken farmer and no more.

Mr Beach has been fined just £100 for the real planning breaches. Runnymede Council were denied their costs by all presiding judges. However, for some extraordinary reason Mr Beach was ordered to pay £250,000 under the Proceeds of Crime Act or face 3 years in prison.

Mr Beach has tried to sell his land, or parts thereof, in order to avoid a jail term. But, surprise surprise, Runnymede Council swiftly block and put off all potential buyers.

To add to the harassment. Mr Beach’s wife has now also been summons to appear at a Crown Court to answer to an ‘additional’ claim of £250,000 by Trading Standards. Presumably following instructions from Runnymede Council.

Runnymede Borough Council have spent an estimated £2m of tax payers money on this matter. This website is dedicated to exposing, not just Runnymede councillors but also councillors from all over the UK. More news to come shortly.

 

Latest Comments . . .

  • Fannie
    Hi, I do think this is an excellent website. I stumbledupon it ;) I will come ...

    Read more...

     
  • Alejandro
    You actually make it seem so easy with your presentation but I find this matter to ...

    Read more...

     
  • H.Benson
    They are all corrupt .

    Read more...

     
  • Candy Culvert
    Process of planning policy; property developer proposes;planni ng officers recommend ...

    Read more...

     
  • Danny Beach
    Hi Candy, this clown cost the taxpayer £130.000 per year plus perks, that's a lot ...

    Read more...

     
  • Candy Culvert
    Have got written confirmation from Paul Turrell that he is extremely satisfied ...

    Read more...

     
  • Geoff Cooper
    Paul Clough was employed as a solicitor at Bournemouth Borough Council.He was ...

    Read more...

     
  • derek ellis
    their constitutional contract operating from an unlawful premise. reason 1 because ...

    Read more...

     
  • derek ellis
    do not assume they know the law- they only know what they want to use against ...

    Read more...

     
  • derek ellis
    Matter of Record court claim to operate from the premise of honesty, integrity, justice ...

    Read more...

     
  • derek ellis
    ARTICLE 1 - THE CONSTITUTION 1.01 Powers of the Council The Council will exercise ...

    Read more...

     
  • Hannah Rose
    I know to my cost how rotten RBC is! I've had my own battle with them for some ...

    Read more...

     
  • Slim Eccleston.
    Oh dear this is getting so repetative, dodgy council workers taking either ...

    Read more...

     
  • Anon
    Your timing is just about perfect,spinnin g the magna carta/democracy then this site ...

    Read more...